Ocena częstości występowania zespołu Wolframa w populacji dzieci z cukrzycą
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Wolfram syndrome (WFS) is the most frequent syndromic form of monogenic diabetes coexisting with optic atrophy and many other disorders. The aim of this study was to estimate the prevalence of Wolfram syndrome among children with diabetes in Poland. MATERIAL AND METHODS: These calculations were performed among Polish diabetic children, aged 0-18 years, from three administrative regions between January 2005 and December 2011. Epidemiological data was obtained by matching the results from the EURO-WABBPoland Project and the PolPeDiab Registry. RESULTS: Throughout the study period, we confirmed genetic diagnosis of Wolfram syndrome in 13 patients from Poland. Three patients originated from the studied regions with complete epidemiological data on paediatric diabetes. The total number of patients with diagnosed diabetes in the study equalled 2,568 cases. The prevalence of Wolfram syndrome among Polish children with diabetes is 0.12% (95% Confidence Interval 0.04-0.34%). CONCLUSIONS: We estimate that Wolfram syndrome is: 26 to 35 times less frequent than monogenic diabetes (MODY and neonatal diabetes) in the Polish paediatric population.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".